Multimedia Content Creation Performance

MCC Winstone 2004

Multimedia Content Creation Winstone 2004 tests the following applications in various usage scenarios:

  • Adobe® Photoshop® 7.0.1
  • Adobe® Premiere® 6.50
  • Macromedia® Director MX 9.0
  • Macromedia® Dreamweaver MX 6.1
  • Microsoft® Windows MediaTM Encoder 9 Version 9.00.00.2980
  • NewTek's LightWave® 3D 7.5b
  • SteinbergTM WaveLabTM 4.0f

All chips were tested with Lightwave set to spawn 4 threads.

Content Creation Application Performance

Once again, AMD's 3500+ takes the lead in the MCC tests, despite the benefits of dual core in the area. 


ICC SYSMark 2004

The first category that we will deal with is 3D Content Creation. The tests that make up this benchmark are described below:

"The user renders a 3D model to a bitmap using 3ds max 5.1, while preparing web pages in Dreamweaver MX. Then the user renders a 3D animation in a vector graphics format."

SYSMark 2004

Next, we have 2D Content Creation performance:

"The user uses Premiere 6.5 to create a movie from several raw input movie cuts and sound cuts and starts exporting it. While waiting on this operation, the user imports the rendered image into Photoshop 7.01, modifies it and saves the results. Once the movie is assembled, the user edits it and creates special effects using After Effects 5.5."

SYSMark 2004

The Internet Content Creation suite is rounded up with a Web Publishing performance test:

"The user extracts content from an archive using WinZip 8.1. Meanwhile, he uses Flash MX to open the exported 3D vector graphics file. He modifies it by including other pictures and optimizes it for faster animation. The final movie with the special effects is then compressed using Windows Media Encoder 9 series in a format that can be broadcast over broadband Internet. The web site is given the final touches in Dreamweaver MX and the system is scanned by VirusScan 7.0."

SYSMark 2004

SYSMark shows the exact opposite with the Pentium D taking the lead in all three of the ICC tests. 

Business Application Performance Encoding Performance
Comments Locked

106 Comments

View All Comments

  • GregL - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    P.S. I love your site... been reading it for years now.
  • GregL - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    Anand,

    Thanks for the explanation and the quick reply.

    Have an excellent day,

    Greg
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    GregL

    Last time I checked (which admittedly was a while ago), SMP support was broken in the later builds of Q3A. I can't remember if it was Quake 3 or the combination of Q3 and ATI/NV drivers, but the performance stopped improving.

    Take care,
    Anand
  • GregL - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    I know Quake3 is dated but how about a quick benchmark with the new dual core CPU. Quake 3 is supposed to support dual core.

    seta r_smp "1"

    Thanks,
    Greg
  • Goi - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    I didn't know 50 cent was an avid reader of AT
  • Tuborg - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    It`s nice to finaly see some competition from Intel.
    They slapped together theyr old stuff in a new package. But we all know that a new package isen`t going to change anything(Like wrapping s*** in gold paper).

    Be happy as longe as it last, and have your 15min of fame.
    Remember they rushed out the dual core, and they did it for you IndelJugen!.
  • Viditor - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    Thanks for the article Anand...none of us take Charlie seriously anyway...

    "AMD's dual core will be quite impressive, even more so than Intel's"

    I am hearing the same. There is some serious research work being done in the TV and Film industry right now with the dualcore Opterons, and it is MOST impressive! Still under NDA (as are we all), I can only say that the results so far have been much better than expected!
  • Son of a N00b - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    Thank You Anand for the great article, especially the info on the NCQ. Great writing, and overall a very good read.

    btw, I understand how fusterated you must feel making these benchmarks, not having things work, trying to remember all the things you want/have to do next, ect......Keep it up Anand, that is why you are the best!...try to get some sleep though m8 :-P

    I would probably say that the 2.2 ghz from AMD it would not be compared to the dualCPU in this article because if the 2.2 is going to probably be the FX line, then it would be compared with the top of the line of Intel's...remember this was an article about "value" dual cores (oxymoron ;-))...so due to price and probably performace it would not be paired with the Pentium D at 2.8...sort of like AMD's naming scheme, an AMD 2800 at 1.8 ghz matches up with a 2.8 ghz Intel...so I would assume that AMD's biggest baddest dualy will blow Intel out of the water...and not because i am an incessant AMD fanboy because i am an avid gamer, but becuase of AMD's past performace, and AMD architechure is designed for dual core. We shall see, wh shall see...

    *STATEMENT: The author of this post is not hereby responsible for any grammatical errors, typing, or syntax, of any kind.* lol
  • Googer - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    In adition to my #57 post,

    In the future I cannot Imagine the power requrements of CPU's they may end up needing their own 500watt dedicated supply and a second one for HDD's, GPU's, Fans, motherboards, and accessories.
  • Googer - Wednesday, April 6, 2005 - link

    The only thing more ineffieciant than a 250watt fully loaded Prescott is the old eniac, It was said that when it was turned on the Whole City of Philadelphia would go in to a brown out. I am afraid that modern processors are taking steps back instead of forward.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now